1. Session 3: Attraction

2.  Find 10 participants of different age, gender and culture and ask them what constitutes love?  Are there any differences similarities?  Why might it be difficult to agree on what love is cross-culturally?  What methodological considerations could you undertake to carry out a more complete study?

3.  Examine biological, psychological and social origins of attraction What the command terms mean… Examine: Examine: Consider an argument or concept in a way that uncovers the assumptions and interrelationships of the issue.

8. 1. Neurobiology of love 2. MHC genes & attraction 3. The role of hormones

9. 1. Evolutionary explanation 1: Neurobiology of love 2. Evolutionary Explanation 2: Partner selection based on genes

10. Brainstorm

11. Fisher (2004) love is a human universal and evolution has produced 3 distinct motivational brain systems in all birds and mammals to direct courtship, mating, reproduction and parenting: 1.Attraction 2.Sex Drive 3.Attachment According to Fisher, the 3 systems interact with each other to produce the combination of emotions, motivations and behaviours associated with “love” She argues that serotonin, dopamine and adrenaline all play an important role in the “symptoms” of love

12. 1. Attraction  According to Fisher attraction is the equivalent to human romantic love in animals  Attraction is characterised by increased energy, focused attention on a specific mate, obsessive following, affiliative gestures, possessive mate- guarding and motivation to win a preferred mating partner  Attraction evolved to motivate individuals to select and focus courtship attention on one partner

13. 2. Sex Drive  Characterised by craving for sexual gratification  In humans this is associated primarily with testosterone in both men and women  The sex drive evolved to produce offspring

14. 3. Attachment  Mutual nest building, grooming, maintenance of close proximity, separation anxiety and shared parental chores characterise attachment in animals  Animal research suggests that this brain system is associated primarily with oxytocin and vasopressin in the nucleus accumbens (brain’s reward centre)  Attachment evolved to motivate individuals to stay with the preferred reproductive partner long enough to complete parental duties and experience this as rewarding

15. Fisher et al (2003) fMRI study of neurobiological mechanism of attraction

16. Aim: to investigate the neural mechanisms associated with the attraction system (romantic love) Procedure:  10 women & 7 men aged 18-26 who reported being in love for an average of 7.5 months  Participants first completed questionnaire (Passionate Love Scale) to investigate how they felt about their relationship  Then placed in a fMRI scanner  First looked at a photograph of their beloved, then performed distraction task of counting backwards, and finally looked at a photograph of a neutral acquaintance  This was repeated 6 times

17. Fisher et al (2003) fMRI study of neurobiological mechanism of attraction Results:  Increased activity in the dopamine rich brain areas associated with reward, motivation and goal orientation when participant looked at lover (ventral tegmental area and caudate nucleus)Conclusions  Results indicate the possibility of brain circuits dedicated to attraction (romantic love)  The same brain circuits have been associated with addiction which could support the hypothesis that “romantic love is an addiction”  Fisher argues that romantic love is universal and based on neurobiological factors

18. Read the article and summarise key points. Be ready to discuss with the class.

19. Background  Wedekind studied Major Histocompatability Complex (MHC)  MHC= group of genes that enable the immune system to recognise pathogens. In general the more diverse the MHC genes of parents, the stronger the immune system of the offspring  MHC genes are expressed codominantly (we inherit equal amounts from both parents)  Evolutionary psychologists argue our “smell” is a sign of our MHC

20. Aim: to determine whether MHCs would affect mate choice in womenMethod:  49 female & 44 males from a Switzerland University  MHC of each participant was tested and a wide variety of MHCs included in sample  Women were also asked if they were taking contraceptive pills.  Participants were all strangers

21. Method:  Men were asked to wear a t-shirt for 2 nights and to keep t-shirt in a plastic bag during the day  Used perfume free soap, asked to refrain from using deodorant and to avoid spicy food, alcohol and cigarettes  Women given nasal spray for 2 weeks before experiment to sensitise smell perception  After 2 days, women were asked to smell 7 of the t- shirts and rank in terms of attractiveness  3 of the t-shirts were from men with similar MHC to woman, 3 with different MHC and one unworn t-shirt as a control

22. Results:  Women preferred odours of men who had different MHC to them  EXCEPT THOSE ON CONTRACEPTIVE PILLS WHO PREFERRED SIMILAR MHCConclusions Supports evolutionary argument for mate selection MHC genes linked to mate choice Contraceptive pill interferes with natural mate choice

23.  Modern research has discovered that 2 hormones help to increase the bond between lovers 1.Oxytocin 2.Vasopressin

24.  Oxytocin is a powerful hormone, released in both men and women during touching and sex, that tends to deepen and intensify feelings of attachment. Thus, couples feel closer and more bonded.  Oxytocin is also released during childbirth and scientists believe that it helps to secure the bond between mother and infant.  Experiments conducted on lab rats have shown that when oxytocin in inhibited, new mothers reject their young

25. Vasopressin  Another important hormone for long-term commitment is vasopressin  Also released during sex Winslow et al (1993)  Conducted experiment on prairie voles  These animals tend to form stable pair ponds and have more sex than is necessary for reproduction just as humans do  When male prairie voles were given a drug that suppressed vasopressin, they lost their devotion to their mates and no longer protected them from potential suitors.  It was concluded that vasopressin plays an important role in male attachment and mating behavior

26. 1. Similarity-attraction hypothesis 2. Attraction-Similarity model 3. Reciprocity

27.  Theory assumes people are likely to be attracted to individuals who are similar to themselves

28.  Age  Religion  Social class  Cultural background  Personality  Education  Intelligence  Physical attractiveness  Attitudes  Hobbies/interests

29. Why do we like people more similar to ourselves?  Even though modern societies often consist of many different ethnic groups, there is a tendency for people to live in areas where people are like themselves.  Also people tend to assume that those who are similar to them will like them.  Byrne (1971) argues that other people’s support for one’s own views and attitudes is rewarding because it validates one’s opinions and boosts self-esteem.

30. Aim: to investigate if people would describe ideal mate similar to themselves Procedure  169 undergraduate students (66 males and 103 females) all of whom were seeking romantic partners  Recruited through advertisements indicating that researchers were looking for single students interested in finding a partner  Participants were asked to complete questionnaires: self rated personality, personality of romantic ideal and filler questionnaires to disguise exact purpose of study.

31.  Results suggested that both males and females desired romantic partners who were very similar to themselves

32. Aim: to investigate whether similarity in partners is linked to relationship obtainment & relationship qualityProcedure  106 heterosexual romantic couples that had been in a monogamous relationship for at least a year  In order to encourage independent and honest answers participants were tested in separate rooms  Completed questionnaires: self rated personality & relationship quality (Marriage Interaction Scale) which asked questions like ‘how committed do you feel towards your partner?’ ‘how often do you argue?’

33. Results  Level of agreement between participants on quality of relationship was found to be significantly reliable  Results indicated that couples with high relationship quality tended to be similar to each other

35. Evaluation  Provides important information about romantic ideals, romantic obtainment and relationship quality  Reliance on self report data. There may be issues with self-enhancement or self-deception  Method of recruitment of participants may have resulted in a sample that is not representative of general population  Only US sample- cultural issues?  Only heterosexual participants used? Other issues with generalisation?

36.  Conducted a field study in a student dorm to investigate if students’ friendship formations were influenced by attitudes and values  For a semester, 17 male students were offered rent free accommodation in return for filling out several questionnaires throughout the course of the semester

37. Study found that students with similar attitudes tended to become friends. Similarity in race and socioeconomic background also played a role

39.  When people are attracted to other people they tend to perceive them as similar  People prefer friends and partners who are similar in terms of attitudes and traits but the perceived similarity may not always be accurate  Perceived similarity is a major factor in attraction and relationship satisfaction and it has psychological benefits because it validates one’s own views (reinforcement)

40. Aim to investigate if people would be likely to: 1. Perceive ideal partners as similar to themselves (in line with similarity-attraction hypothesis) 2. Perceive former partners as different from themselves (in line with attraction-similarity hypothesis) 3. Perceive similarity as an important factor in attraction

41. Procedure  Participants were 871 (612 women and 259 men) recruited from a dating website  Online study  Personality was assessed using abridged scale based on five- factor model of personality. Some of factors included:  Uncreative-creative  Lazy-hardworking  Shy-outgoing  Quiet-talkative  Vengeful-forgiving  Participants completed same questionnaire 3 times: one for themselves, one for ideal partner and one for a former partner  Participants were also asked how important they perceived similarity to be in romantic relationships  Correlations for men and women for computed separately in order to examine potential sex differences

42. Results  Findings provide strong support for similarity- attraction hypothesis  Responses indicated that participants desired a partner similar to themselves in terms of personality, attractiveness and intelligence.  Participants seemed unaware of their preference for a similar mate with most rating that similarity was unimportant  Study also supports attraction-similarity hypothesis: former partners were perceived as being dissimilar in terms of personality

43. Evaluation  Research is highly relevant and may help to shed light on high relationship break up rates  Obtained a large sample that was heterogeneous to age (many studies on attraction use relatively young individuals)  Issues with generalisability: although internet dating is becoming a socially acceptable way of finding a mate, those people who engage in it may differ from those who try to find a mate differently. May not be representative of all singles looking for a mate.  No data was collected about length of relationship with former partner or time passed since the break-up. These factors may have influenced results.

45.  Theory of reciprocity based on social exchange theory  States that relationships are dependent on people’s perception of rewards and costs  Reciprocity occurs when you like those who show that they like you

46. Aims ◦ to investigate if people would rate someone higher in likeability if they believed that the person like them ◦ To see if believing someone else likes us makes us more likeableProcedure  60 same sex pair - previously unacquainted 5 min get to know each other Higher liking of person if told the other person likes them first  If we believe somebody else likes us, we will be a more likable person in their presence; this will lead them to actually like us more—a self-fulfilling prophecy (Curtis & Miller, 1986).

48. Proximity Theory Theory suggests that by simply being in the physical presence of another individual will enhance the probability of becoming friends/finding someone attractive

49. Aim: to investigate formation of friendship patterns at Westgate Housing for student couples Procedure:  Field study  Researchers tracked friendship formation among the couples in various apartment buildings.  Residents had been assigned to their apartments at random. Most were strangers when they moved in.  Researchers made observations and interviewed the researchers regularly

50. Results:  Researchers asked the residents to name their three closest friends in the entire housing project.  Just as the propinquity effect would predict, 65% of the friends mentioned lived in the same building, even though the other buildings were not far away.

51.  Even more striking was the pattern of friendships within a building: 41% of the next-door neighbors indicated they were close friends. 22% of those who lived two doors apart said so. Only 10 percent of those who lived on opposite ends of the hall indicated they were close friends

52. Based on this theory who else may have been friends?

53.  Consider the friendship choices of the residents of apartments 1 and 5.  Living at the foot of the stairs and in one case near the mailboxes meant that these couples saw a great deal of upstairs residents.  Sure enough, apartment dwellers in apartments 1 and 5 throughout the complex had more friends upstairs than dwellers in the other first-floor apartments did.

54.  Geographical proximity may still be a factor in finding friends and lovers but with the Internet, dating sites, and chat rooms people at distance can now easily contact each other and develop friendships or romantic relationships.  The Internet is thus creating a “psychological proximity” that can replace the “geographical proximity”.

55.  Evolutionary theories claim that attraction is determined by biological factors.  This implies that cross-culturally men and women should prefer the same in their partners (universal factors)  This is only true to an extent  Culture seems to play a role as well

56. Aim: to identify the characteristics that individuals valued in potential mates worldwideProcedure:  37 samples from 33 countries and 5 islands located on 6 continents  10, 047 participants in total with an average of 272 from each culture  Self report method used to look at what factors were important in choosing a mate

57. Task:  Read the results section that you have been assigned and summarise it in your own words  Be ready to share your findings with the class

58.  Respondents in nearly all cultures rated “mutual attraction and love” as the most important in a relationship.  This shows that the desire for mutual love in a relationship is not merely a Western phenomenon.

59.  “Chastity” showed the largest effect for culture  Chastity was valued in China, India, Taiwan, Palestinian Israel, and Iran.  Respondents in the Netherlands and the Scandinavian countries did not care about chastity.

60.  “Good financial prospects”, “good earning capacity”, ambition, and social status are consistently valued more in a partner by women than men cross-culturally

61.  “Youth” is valued more by men than women.  Men prefer wives that are younger but how much younger depends on the culture.  In cultures that allow many wives, there may be large age differences

62.  “Physical attractiveness” in a partner is valued more by men than women.  Cross-cultural norms of physical attractiveness are, for example, clear and supple skin, regular features, full lips.

63.  Offers some support for evolutionary theories. Females value financial capacity of potential mates more than men do. Ambition and industriousness also important. Support evolutionary hypothesis about females looking for a mate who will be a good provider.  Males valued physical attractiveness and relative youth more than females supports evolutionary theories that males will be attracted to females that have high reproductive capacity.  Biggest cultural difference was chastity.

64. Evaluation  Largest and most varied sample ever obtained on mate preferences  Samples cannot be viewed as representative of populations in each country. In general rural, less- educated and lower levels of socioeconomic status were underrepresented.  Study had issues with translation which may have affected results.

66.  Physical attractiveness is a major determinant of liking in studies of first impressions.  Hatfield et al. (1966) conducted a classic computer dating study that randomly matched students for a blind date at a dance at freshman orientation. Major determinant for attraction was physical attractiveness.  Meta-analysis by Feingold (1990) finds that both sexes value attractiveness, although men value it somewhat more than women; however, this difference is larger for stated attitudes and values than for actual behavior.  Regan and Berscheid (1997) find that both sexes rate physical attractiveness as the most important characteristic determining desire of a sexual partner.  Physical attractiveness plays a powerful role in homosexual as well as heterosexual relationships

67. What Is Attractive?  The media bombards us with a standard of beauty, and also associates beautiful characters with morally good ones; because of the media we develop shared standards of beauty.  For both sexes, this standard includes large eyes, prominent cheekbones, and a big smile. For women, a small nose and chin, narrow cheeks, large pupils and high eyebrows are considered attractive; for men, a large chin is considered attractive (Cunningham, 1986; Cunningham et al., 1990).  Surprisingly, there is a large agreement across cultures in what is considered physically attractive in the human face.

68. The “What is beautiful is good” stereotype is relatively narrow, affecting people’s judgments about an individual only in specific areas. The beautiful are thought to be more: ◦ Sociable ◦ Extraverted ◦ Popular o Sexual o Happy o Assertive

69.  In support of this idea, Snyder, Tanke, and Berscheid (1977) showed that when men thought that the woman they were talking with over the phone was physically attractive, they acted more warmly towards her; this led her, in turn, to act warmer, more confident, and more animated.  Anderson and Bem (1981) replicated the study showing the same effect for women’s beliefs about men’s attractiveness.

70.  We actively seek individuals who are most like ourselves (attractiveness wise). This compromise is necessary because of fear of rejection from a more attractive person. What are his chances?

71.  Murstein (1972)The physical attractiveness of engaged couples were judged and the was firm evidence to support each couple as being physically similar.

72. Attraction is complex and a lot of factors are involved Initial Attraction  Physical attractiveness  Genetic factors  Proximity Maintenance of attraction  Similarity of attitudes and values